Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Tracker Alignment] update split vertex validation #36178

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 19, 2021

Conversation

mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich mmusich commented Nov 19, 2021

PR description:

The purpose of this PR is to update the codes for the Split Vertex validation used in Tracker Alignment to make the x-axis limits of the trend plots vs vertex sumPt and the binnings of the profiles vs #tracks and #vertices to be configurable.
The current setup is sort of hardcoded and optimized for the 13TeV collisions and this was a shortcoming found during the validation of the alignment candidates for the Fall 2021 LHC beam test at sqrt=900GeV.
The configurability is percolated all the way down to the all-in-one meta-tool and some checks on the coincidence of the x-axis setup are introduced in the plotting macro FitPVResolution.
I profit of this PR to introduce fillDescriptions method to SplitVertexResolution.

PR validation:

Private. Some results are available here
as example:

image

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

N/A

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36178/26744

  • This PR adds an extra 64KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

    • File Alignment/OfflineValidation/python/TkAlAllInOneTool/primaryVertexResolutionTemplates.py modified in PR(s): Python3syntaxupgrade #36160

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • Alignment/OfflineValidation (alca)

@cmsbuild, @malbouis, @tvami, @yuanchao, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mmusich, @adewit, @tocheng, @tlampen this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Nov 19, 2021

@cmsbuild, please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d6bded/20624/summary.html
COMMIT: ef029f1
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_2_X_2021-11-18-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/36178/20624/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 42
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3327156
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3327134
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 41 files compared)
  • Checked 177 log files, 37 edm output root files, 42 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Nov 19, 2021

+alca

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants